Bob Bunderfeld’s Comments

I normally don't comment on what other Readers post, but OOTB really misses the boat.

The reference to the File Sharing Sites has nothing to do with what they are sharing, or by your definition, what they are stealing. The reference is that even those that STEAL, again using your definition, those people have RIGHTS and DUE PROCESS and the minute you start taking one groups rights away from them, you start taking those same rights away from everyone, et al, the slippery slope.

Mike has never suggested that stealing is a valid way to do anything, what he is saying though is that you cannot just remove someone's right to Due Process simply because you believe they are doing something wrong. That right there is the definition of Tyranny!

I agree with the head of EasyDNS, it's getting creepy out there, and the people are the one's letting these bullies get away with what they do. Perhaps it's true that others don't give a damn and don't care, but that's exactly how the slippery slope begins, and by the time that Snow Ball is heading towards something you do care about, it's already picked up enough momentum that it will squash you like a bug on a summer's night windshield. I'd rather stop that Snow Ball here and now, before it gets too large to deal with. That is what the quote that was being referenced means. Don't believe me? Go look it up and see for yourself. Unless you are like the others, who won't give a damn until it's them that are being wiped out by the big bad Snow Ball bearing down on their heads!

Let's be clear, it's not the iPad that is at fault here. I agree that too many of the US based Magazines would rather have a single application that points to their pretty magazine and not deliver a true Digital Magazine, but some over-blown over-hyped POS.

I particularly enjoy the ZINIO application and find that the Magazine Subscriptions that I have through the App are quite enjoyable. One thing I like is that Zinio not only offers US Magazines, but Magazines from all over the Globe. Sure, at the moment there are some Magazines that aren't offered through Zinio, but that's not Zinio's fault, again, it's the Publisher who for some reason wants to deliver a bloated POS that isn't worth the paper it's printed on, or is that the Packets that it's built with now?

I hope that in the near future, Magazine Publishers just offer a straight up Digital Copy of their work, instead of trying to make something so over-the-top that it becomes a pain in the butt to view or use.

Since none of your art is worth anything while you are alive, and since you can't spend any of the money that one day your art will produce, can I have all the rights to your art after you are dead? It's not like you are going to use it, you'll be dead! No need to let your art suffer after you die, when you can make me so happy when you are alive!

Geez, there's a comic idea in there I'm sure, have a go Nina, will be funny to see what you do with that!

The difference in the Comcast ad is the *. That's right, look close on the screen when they run that ad and notice that there's an asterisk after the word Unlimited. Now, this is true in the Midwest where I live, and I think it's probably true where most live too.

I agree that if you say something in an ad, and you MEANT to say it, then you should be held to it. Let's not get silly and say if someone was doing a Live Commercial spot and they said the first 50 people get a free car when they mean to say that the first 50 people get a chance at a free car, then you can't hold them to that. Actually we do have laws stating that exact thing, no matter how many times Best Buy Web Content personnel put Terrabyte drives on sale for $1.

Isn't this the Country that actually Jails writers of all types if they ever say anything negative or bad about the Prime Minister?

I believe 60 minutes did a piece on a Writer that wrote a book that apparently spoke ill of the Prime Minister and when he arrived in the Country he was promptly arrested and taken before the Prime Minister so he could grovel and apologize for his misgivings and beg to be forgiven.

I believe he meant to say "Welcome to Communism". Tons of people get that wrong, and even using it in this context, they should explain WHICH type of Communism they are speaking of, as the first is known from Antioch in the East, and was meant to be as living in a Commune (Community) free from pressure and judgment.

Not exactly the same type of Communism that was practiced in the Cold War.

Being a Victim of Sexual Abuse growing up, I have a unique view of this situation.

The every fiber of my being would rather lock every sick F*** away and never let them out, but that also goes against the every fiber of my being that was taught, "Do the Crime, Do the Time".

As for putting non-sex-offenders on a the same list as sex-offenders makes just as irate as the other assholes who think sex-registers shouldn't be a part of our life. I hate to break it to you, the World keeps spiraling down a hole, and the only way a Parent or Concerned Citizen could ever know what's going on anymore is by looking up the sex-offender list in their area.

Now, listen, I really can't see the Supreme Court saying this is a Judicious Use of the System as it was first built, so really, I'll lose the rest of the Faith I have in the Govt., if they don't slap this back and tell them to try it again.

Alright, so, let me explain this part. My Father and his Brothers all fought in WWII, in Europe and Pacific (my Father). I learned early on listening to Him and my Uncles about the battles, the scary things they've seen, even discussing Flash Backs and supporting one another during those times. It constructed in me a real fundamental base of what this Country is supposed to stand for. While I absolutely detest Child Abusers, I still say, they have the right to free speech as you or I. I don't have to LIKE what they say, but you know what, an awful lot of people died to be certain we had that right, and I'm not going to start sliding down the slippery slope just because sick F**** are around. We as a Nation need to get back to Basics, we need to be Proud of what our Fore-Fathers have done, fought for and Built. Too much anymore I can't even watch the news because one Party or another is talking too loudly and too fast to give a damn about. I'm neither Pro-Obama or Neg-Obama, what I am is someone that thinks we should throw out all of them and fill that place up with people that really give a damn about the average Joe.

Isn't that true with any "Group" of people watching over others? Hell, without having to dig thru historical documents we can toss our Nazi's, American Colonist, French Royalty, English Royalty, and the list goes on and on and on.

I know I'm going to get slammed from every direction for saying this, but, maybe LVMH has a point.

First, let me say, that you didn't see any other "Branded" products in this commercial, only LVMH. Second, it is customary to get permission from the Brand Holder whenever you use their Branded Items in any type of recorded materials. Third, as has been stated over and again here, the law itself could be the causation for these lawsuits.

So, why didn't Hyundai include any other Branded Items in their commercial? Why not show people eating a Branded Chocolate like Ghiaradali (SP) or the like? Is it because when you do so, you are supposed to get people's approval? Why didn't Hyundai ask LVMH for approval? Seriously, are there not other High-Brands out there that LVMH couldn't have received approval from and used, that they just chose LVMH and hoped it all worked out ok?

As people have said again and again here, the Law itself requires the Holders to aggressively pursue infringements in court to protect their Copyrights. LVMH is doing this, perhaps because they don't want anyone thinking it's "ok" to use their Branded Property or Brands, in any other works.

Do I think sometimes Copyright holders go well above what they should to protect their Copyrights? No doubt, but the flip side says there are reasons they do this, and perhaps if they would change the Laws, these company's wouldn't work so hard at keeping their Brands?

Actually Sir/Ma'am you are incorrect in your conclusion. There is a Fundamental Right to Privacy in the Constitution; just because a single sentence didn't spell it out, doesn't mean that the right isn't there.

Further, the Constitution deals with the Government and it's people. Not interaction between a Publicly Funded Venue and their students. There are CRIMINAL LAWS that deal with what the School has done, and the FBI is currently investigating that fact. Further, the State and Local Authorities are also investigating this case to see if any State or Local laws were broken. Considering that most States base their Laws on the Federal Code with some changes for each States differing philosophy, it's likely that the School District is also being investigated at those levels.

Lastly, what everyone seems to be missing is the fact that the School District said that this Webcam was only activated after they received a report that it had been stolen. If that is the case, why then would the School District not first call the Student's home to verify the report and then call the Police?
The School District employee's and their Supervisor's who approved this "policy/plan" are most likely going to either lose their jobs or perhaps their tenure as punishment. The School District itself is now probably gathering all Documentation and Video Evidence (and if it isn't, it soon will be by subpoena) to hand over to the investigator's. This evidence will be used not only in a Criminal Proceeding, if it goes that way, but for sure in the Civil Proceeding being brought the the Robbin's family. I would be willing to bet the School District Administrator/Superintendent has already been on the phone with their Insurer and have talked about how much Money the School District should offer the Robbin's to settle with a gag order.

The real tragedy here is that the Full Student Body will most likely suffer for this "half-baked" plan of the School Districts. Most likely the School District will end the program that gave every student a Laptop, and could suffer even further cuts depending just how much Money they wind up having to pay-out to either Settle out of Court or after the lengthy Court Battle. In my opinion, the best thing this School District could do now is to admit that the program was problematic, apologize to all the Families of the School District and immediately disabled all webcams on the Laptops permanently. Doing this they would save face, be seen as being responsible, and could wind up not having to pay-out as much money as they think they might have to.

I'm sorry that I forgot to bow down when you walked into the room; guess I'm one of those people that just don't realize you and your friends were more important then the rest of us.

Your argument is ridiculous simply because you think people should do it your way and only your way. If I was sitting around a table with several friends and we were talking about what happened on the last LOST episode, if someone in our group didn't want to hear it, they should excuse their self from the table and go to the bathroom. The same applies to you, just because you want to watch something DELAYED, doesn't mean everyone should do it because you want it that way.

If there is an event I want to watch Delayed, I make it a point NOT to listen to anything that might spoil it for me. Of course, if the event is something HUGE, like say the Super Bowl, I wouldn't expect ESPN not to air the result or highlights until I've had the chance to view my Recording. I have the responsibility, if I want to keep things suspenseful, to NOT put myself in places where the results of the "Big Event" would be announced.

Seriously, people don't have to wait for you to see anything before they start talking about it. I know this might be a shock to your system, but no matter what you think, you are not someone of that great importance; neither am I, and I certainly don't expect ANYONE to not talk about what they watched.

Why Southern Cal is allowed USC over South Carolina I don't understand.

University of South Carolina was established in 1805, while University of Southern California was established in 1880. It would seem to me that if either of these two Schools had the "right" to use the letters of USC, the one who was established first should be given that "right".

Like many though, it's still silly to think that USC can only mean "University of Southern California". Although, with Lane Kiffin now at USC (West) I imagine the Dean of the College is doing everything he can to make sure USC stays with USC (West) even after the NCAA deals them a Death Penalty of Recruiting Violations.

Your correlation between letting someone drive your car and her letting others use her WiFi is complete and utter rubbish. If you want a real correlation, it would be more like, her care getting STOLEN because she left the keys in it, and then it being used to commit one of the crimes you listed. While leaving your keys in the car is foolish, it is NOT against the law. A person cannot be held liable for another persons criminal acts unless a iron-clad connection can be made to show that the person not committing the crime knew the crime was being committed or should have known the crime was being committed.

No where in any of these ACCUSATION cases are any of those being punished, are they being charged with a crime and being found guilty of said crime. Nowhere in our Legal System is there room for ACCUSATIONS and Punishment without proving those Accusations in a Court of Law.

What will eventually happen is one of these cases will make it's way to the Supreme Court and all the Justices will find for the accuser. Our Nation is a Nation of Laws, not a Nation of Accusations. Companies that threaten people with Punishment or BlackBalls will be found to have acted without any DUE DILIGENCE or PROCESS, and they will feel the sting of the High Courts ruling in their Pocketbooks when the Court will let stand the HIGH Payout for acting OUTSIDE our Legal System in these matters.

If the RIAA/MPAA want to make these Civil Cases into Criminal Cases then they will find that they will be paying a HIGH PRICE when it comes to falsely accusing and punishing people who DID NOT commit the crimes they are accused of.

As for you, you should seriously do some study on what happens when ANYONE or ANY CORPORATION acts without DUE CAUSE or PROCESS.

Why is it that everyone that wants to prove someone wrong here, they refuse to identify themselves?

Do you know how much people listen to "Anonymous Coward" posts here? Do you really think you are making any grand points, even if you are right, when you refuse to identify yourself?

Until you, and others like you, are willing to be known, I will, quite frankly, think of you as nothing more then a dimwitted twit, who has Issues with Identification Envy; much like the Microsoft Laywer that wants to be "COOL" to his son, instead of his "Parent".

I think what Mike is saying is you, the Executive Editor, chose someone who has ties to the RIAA to write an article that should be non-biased.

There are plenty of beat writers out there that could have done a piece like this, giving BOTH sides of the coin good press, instead though, Billboard shows that it's merely a mouthpiece of the RIAA when it asks RIAA Friends to write articles and call them nothing but FACT.